Revista Română de Geografie Politică
ISSN 1454-2749, E-ISSN 2065-1619
Year XVI, no. 2, November 2014, pp. 160-169
Article no. 162110-288
SOVIET HERITAGE
AT THE ROMANIAN-UKRAINIAN BORDERLAND
IN POST-SOCIALIST MARAMUREŞ LAND
Ioan VLAD
University of Oradea, Department of Geography, Tourism and Territorial Planning,
1 University str., 410087 Oradea, Romania,
e-mail: [email protected]
Alexandru ILIEŞ
University of Oradea, Department of Geography, Tourism and Territorial Planning,
1 University str., 410087 Oradea, Romania,
University of Gdansk,
4 Pilsudskiego str., Gdansk, Poland,
e-mail: [email protected]
Abstract: Maramureş Land unitary space until 1920, but fragmented in the
interwar period, with a North part in Czechoslovakia and a South part in
Romania but permeable under goods and people circulation, became, once
with the installation after the Second World War of the USSR on the North side
of Tisa river, a sectioned one by a closed border. Although Ukraine was an
independent state affiliated to ONU since 1945, it remained until 1990 as a
component part of USSR. The Union presence in the border crossing area was
realized through building but also destruction of some cultural or economic
edifices. In this paper, we will analyze the soviet inheritance on one hand, with
its icon constructions (railway, bridges, monuments), and on the other hand
through the destruction of some icon territorial systems from pre-soviet
period. Everything is reflected in what remained preserved, degraded, or
(re)built in the Romanian area after the fall of the socialist system in 1990.
Key words: USSR, Ukraina, Romania, Maramureş Land, Romanian-Ukrainian
border, soviet heritage
*
*
*
*
*
*
INTRODUCTION
For the Maramureş Land, the 20th Century remains marked by profound
structural and political mutations, pointed out through a new territorial design.
For that matter, a continuum historical space, known under the name of
Maramureş Land and geographically identified with the depressional space
limited by representative mountain unities (Oaş-Gutâi-Ţibleş, Rodna on West and
South, Maramureş on East and Ukrainian Charpathians on North, consequence
of the first global conflagration, was fragmented on the East-West direction by a
http://rrgp.uoradea.ro/
Soviet heritage at the Romanian-Ukrainian borderland in post-socialist...
161
new political border, the Romanian-Czechoslovakian one (Figure 1). Although
politically speaking there were two territorial systems connected on North and
South by Tisa river (Ilieş and all., 2012), the circulation of goods and people had
the same rhythm and way, situation facilitated by the 8 bridges (3 railways and 5
roads) that connected the two Tisa shores, but also by the ethnic structure of the
population on both sides of the river, favorable in this situation. The Second
World War brought for the first time as a neighbor on the North side of Tisa river
USSR, as a super state over Ukraine (independent state affiliated to ONU from
1945). The border gradually closed, becoming a hermetic and with no border
crossing traffic. Barbed wire, plough border area and extremely visible and strong
military guard replaced the formalism of the Romanian-Czechoslovakian border.
Nevertheless, the soviet benefited from ‘'their socialist political system’’ and
marked their territory through a serial of specific edifices: the railway with broadgauge between the localities Valea Vişeului and Câmpulung la Tisa (figure 1); the
railway bridge between Câmpulung la Tisa and Teresva (figure 7); the border
crossing point in Halmeu for the mining in Băiţa Bihor and other war debts that
Romania was obliged to pay to the USSR; the soviet hero cemetery in Sighetu
Marmaţiei (figure 5) and other Romanian cities, soviet monuments etc. On the
opposite side we remember the gradual destruction of some symbols between the
two sides of the Tisa River, like the 8 bridges (figures 3 and 8). Some of them were
destroyed by Romania in1968 in order to prevent a USSR invasion, similar to the
one in Czechoslovakia, because of the Romania’s opposition actions to USSR and
its Warsaw Pact alliances from that year.
Figure 1. Borders,
historical regions, euroregions and political territorial systems
during the last Century (1916-2014) in the area of actual (2014)
Romanian-Ukrainian border and borderlands
(Ilieş & Wendt, 2014, 297); (data sources: Rey et al., 2002, p. 17; Ilieş, 2007; Ştefănescu et al.,
2007a, p. 115-116; Ştefănescu et al., 2007b, 119-120; Smolyoi, 2007, p. 22; Kocsis, 2007, p. 29;
Hajdu, 2009, p. 23)
THOOLS AND METHODOLOGY
Another analysis in the border area is represented by a suitable approach
in order to reach the objectives proposed in the study. The instruments and
specific methodology used in a political geographical study with an inter-subject
approach, are exploited in the specific literature of spatial nature with regional
162
Ioan VLAD, Alexandru ILIEŞ
impact (Foucher, 1991; Kleinschmager, 1993; Short, 1993; Glassner, 1995;
Bodocan, 1997; Stamate, 1997; Ilieş, 2004; Popa, 2006; Ilieş, G., 2007; Ilieş &
Grama, 2010a; Ilieş et all., 2012), territorial planning (Cunha, 1998; Ianoş,
2000, Ilieş and all, 2011a; 2011b); and territorial order (Boar, 2005; Johnson et
all, 2011) but also geopolitical and geostrategic (Wendt, 2003; Neguţ et all, 2004;
Bufon & Ilieş, 2011), historical approach (Mihaly de Apşa,1900; Filipaşcu, 2002;
Boar, 2005 etc) represent arguments in favor of a believable scientific approach
on one side and social utility on the other side. From several studies based on
borderline (Bodocan, 1997; Ilieş, 2003, 2004; Boar, 2005; Popa, 2006; Ilieş D.,
2008; Violante & Vitale, 2010; Ilieş et all., 2011; 2011a; 2012; Ilieş & Wendt,
2014), or on borderline domain and especially on the meaning of borderline
systems and functions (Ilieş M. et all., 2010; Ilieş & Vlad, 2014), there are only a
few research directions that operate with a big variety of instruments and
analysis methods.
DISCUSSIONS AND RESULTS
Over the 20th Century the Romanian-Soviet continuity, especially the
inclusion of Romania in the socialist space over lapses the period of 1948-1989.
Until the Second World War, Romania’s North neighbor in the Maramureş sector
was Czechoslovakia (Figure 1; Boar, 2005; Ilieş et all., 2012; Ilieş & Wendt,
2014; Ilieş & Vlad, 2014), and beginning with 1991 (August) through attainment
of independence, Ukraine becomes again a de facto neighbor to Romania. It is
worth mentioned that once with the fall of socialist system in 1989, the period to
the Ukraine’s independence in 1991, USSR’s place was taken by the
The Commonwealth of Independent States (CSI).
For that matter, the first Romanian contact in space with USSR takes
place after the beginning of the Second World War through the occupation of
Galicia, thus reaching in the East vicinity of Maramureş Land (Boar, 2005, 239).
The profound contact inherited till present day happened on 28 of January
1946, when”The Independent Sub-Carpathian Ukraine’’ is transformed into
Zakarphatia Region and incorporated to S.S.R. Ukraine as part of USSR (Boar,
2005, 241). The Soviet inheritance can have a historical dimension through facts
and a geographical one through territorial realities. These two dimensions
reflected by the approach ways of this study, show: elements ‘’enlighten’’ in the
socialist period and with a dominant soviet fingerprint; elements from
Maramureş enlighten in the pre-soviet period, and that the socialist period
brought them to ruin or destruction as consequence of USSR’s actions.
Elements from Maramureş destroyed as a result of soviet neighboring
Most of these elements include buildings that during the socialist
administration began to degrade or have been destroyed, being connected to the
neighboring link and USSR’s actions. In the same time, there were build other
buildings whose utility served only the USSR. An important category is
represented by the connection bridges between the two sides of Tisa River, the so
called historical bridges.
a.) The historical bridges. The eight historical bridges over the Tisa River
(3 railways and 5 roads) ensured until the Second World War the ‘’historical’’
link between the two shores, previously mentioned in the Maramureş Land
space, even though in the interwar period the North political vicinity was the
Soviet heritage at the Romanian-Ukrainian borderland in post-socialist...
163
same with Czechoslovakia. Over a 60 km long (Stamate, 1997), corresponding
with the hydrographical support mentioned and established after the First World
War (1920), according to figure 2, we established no less than 18 double
settlements, generated by a political border, placed ’’face to face’’ on both sides of
State border
Tisa River.
Figure 2. Tisa Valley. Romanian-Ukrainain borderland
Moreover, a part of these, until the
establishment of the border line, were identified as
a single settlement (Figure 2): Teceu Mic
(ROU)/Tiachiv (UA); Remeţi/ Bedevlia, Săpânţa
/Teresva, Câmpulung la Tisa/Hruşevo, Sighetu
Marmaţiei/Solotvino (Slatina); Sighet (Cămara)/
Bila Ţerkva (Biserica Albă); Lunca la Tisa/Luh; Bocicoiu Mare/Velikii Bicikiv,
Valea Vişeului/Khmeliv/Dilove. The intern systemic functionality over the Tisa
River was assured by the eight bridges mentioned above.
1.) A first consequence of Soviet neighboring was the split of functional relations
between the localities set on both sides of Tisa River, once with the inclusion of
Transcarpathian Ukraine into USSR, and the transformation of the border from an opened
one into a closed one.
Although some bridges continued to exist after 1945 but unfunctional,
through a hermetic closed border, some other bridges were destroyed in 1968,
dynamited by the Romanian administration. It happened as a result of USSR’s
threatens to invade Romania, because of Romania’s refuse to join the Warsaw
Pact Alliances to the Czechoslovakia’s invasion. The only material inheritance
that remained, is a half of a bridge in Teceu Mic (Figure 3), situated on the
Ukrainian side on present day (ex-Soviet). A second proof is the Ukrainian part
of the bridge in Camara Sighet, moved by the Ukrainian administration in 2003
on the new historical bridge (down river from the original place) and included in
it (Figure 8). Other bridges can only be identified by their pillars or parts of
pillars that certify their existence, for example the one in Lunca la Tisa and two
others (railway and road) in Bocicoiu Mare.
164
Ioan VLAD, Alexandru ILIEŞ
Figure 3. Rest of Historical Bridge over Tisa between Tiacev (Ukraina)
and Teceu Mic (Romania) destroyed after The Second World War
Vicarious/restructured elements as a result of Soviet neighboring
b.) Railway. In the unitary period of Maramureş Land, placed under
Austro-Hungarian administration, the Tisa River Valley was also an important
circulation axis on the West-East, and the trans-Carpathian connection towards
South, was done only by roads and cols. Regarding the railway, the first one
built under Austro-Hungarian administration, was in 1972 (Boar, 2005, 212), on
route from Khust towards Sighet with ramification at Valea Vişeului (from 1894;
Figure 2) from where a line continued along the Vişeu River, an tributary to Tisa
River towards Borşa, built in 1913, and another one towards North, on Tisa
Valley through Iasinia, with connection over the Ukrainian Carpathians towards
Galicia and Bukovina. To these are added the narrow railways (mainly forest
ones, built from 1883) that connected Sighet with the salt mining in Coştiui,
Ocna Șugatag and, the forest area of Igniş-Gutâi Mountains up to the present
day resort, named Izvoare. The first connection of the Romanian Maramureş
railway (Sighet-Borşa) with the one in Transylvania, was made in the years that
followed the Second World War, the 50’s, (Pop, 1984) through the building of
Salva-Vişeu section.
2.) Another consequence of the soviet neighboring through a hermetic border is
represented by the severance of the Tisa railway axis from Maramureş Land on the
Câmpulung la Tisa-Valea Vişeului-Borşa, that determined the built of Salva-Vişeu railway line.
3.) The third consequence with positive effects was the connection of the remaining
railway sector in Transylvania, between the years 1946-1950, but with enormous spending
and even human life loss, on one of the most difficult sites of that time (Salva-Vişeu).
c.) The roads. In the same situation with the railways, the closing of the
border with USSR, determined the amputation of the connections that ensured
the 5 bridges and the reorientation of traffic from a transversal to a parallel one
in relation to Tisa River (figure 2). In the new political-territorial design, the
relations of Romanian historical Maramureş with the surrounding areas was
realized exclusively through altitude and cols: Huta col towards West, towards
Oaş Land Gutâi col, Rotunda and Setref towards South, to Transylvania; and
Prislop col (1416 m) towards East, to Bukovina.
4.) The new hermetic border over Tisa determined a reorganization of the
communication system towards the interior of every border subsystem (Ilieş et al, 2012)
through sectioning and blocking of the transversal connections over Tisa.
d.) The creation of face to face localities. Regarding this, we mention
the fact that until the establishment of the border with Czechoslovakia in 1920,
Soviet heritage at the Romanian-Ukrainian borderland in post-socialist...
165
there were localities whose administrative territory developed on both sides of
the Tisa River (Teceu, Bocicoiu Mare, Sighet and Lunca). If in the between wars
period there appeared for the first time under administrative level the double
localities, after the installation of soviet system, these became de facto parallel
territorial systems, with no functional links (figure 2) and almost identical
names. All these had an effect on the inter-human relations and the economic
status of the population.
5.) Another consequence is due to the consolidated division and restructure of some
unitary and functional territorial systems, kind of localities through internal organization
under double localities, with no functional connections and a separate and divergent
evolution, under flux orientation and collaboration relations (Ilieş et all, 2012).
e.) The role of impenetrable barrier with a dominant function of
human flux control (no border crossing points) and the military state
border. Thus, it appeared parallel communication and transport systems, back
to back and no functional links (Boar, 2005, p.213).
Soviet elements inherited in the Romanian space
f.) Remembrance elements. In this category, we could include the soviet
soldier’s graveyard in Sighetu Marmaţiei, set presently in a very good
preservation and maintenance (Figure 5A). These were built in 1944-1954 to
sign of respect for the soviet army that crossed the Maramureş territory in the
Second World War. On others monuments are in the center of the city were, till
1990, was a red star who was replace with white cross (Figure 5B).
A
B
Figure 5. Sighetu Marmaţiei. The Soviet Monument cemetery (A)
and Monument (former Soviet) from the center of the city (B)
6.) This monument cemetery points (Figure 5A) out Romania’s respect over the soviet
soldiers fallen in the Second World War, in Maramureş area.
g.) Broad-gauge railway. Because of the inadequate relief conditions to
built on the right side of Tisa River, between Soltvino/Slatina and Dilove, after
the Second World War, USSR built a railway under soviet norms (large: 1520
mm) and used only for the soviet trains, using the route existing in the AustroHungarian period. So, we consider that this is the only place in Romania,
where on the same embankment are two types of railway: an old one with
European gauge and the soviet type with big gauge. Only the Câmpulung la
Tisa-Teresva sector is exclusively with soviet type line (Figure 6). This railway
ensured the connection of that on the USSR’s territory between Teresva to vest
166
Ioan VLAD, Alexandru ILIEŞ
and Dilove to East (Figure 2). Through the building of this railway on the
Romanian side, according to international legislation but also, through the
leader of the socialist world position that USSR had, Romania commissioned a
part of its territorial sovereignty to USSR through the rights of utility and
transit of this railway and means of transportation on Romanian territory. It
was exclusively built for merchandise transportation. After 1990, after
Ukraine’s independence and reopening of people’s transit, gradually this
railway was used mainly by a Ukrainian train (Figure 6), for people
transportation and connected the localities Tiaciv-Câmpulung la Tisa-Sighetu
Marmaţiei-Valea Vişeului-Rahiv (Figure 2). The increase of border crossing
criminality (smuggling of cigarettes especially) determined the Ukrainians in
2007 to suspend this route. Today, the railway is unexploited, abandoned (no
current maintenance). With all this, taking into consideration the fact that the
border with Ukraine is an external EU and NATO one, Romania undertook a
serial of works regarding the protection of the railway (Figure 6), including
reconstruction works after the flooding in 2000.
7.) The railway with big wheelbase is an important objective of the Soviet inheritance
in the Romanian area and could be rehabilitated and used with success as a new touristic
landmark in the ex-Soviet space
Figure 6. Large railway (ex-Soviet and Ukrainian) on the Romanian territory
and Ukrainian train
h.) Iron Railway Bridge from Câmpulung Tisa-Teresva (Figure 7). Is an
economical building, built in 1872 (Horvath & Kubinsky) and survived the
socialist period due to its extremely important role in ensuring the connection of
the soviet railway line on the right side of Tisa. This bridge played an important
role in the reopening of border crossing after 1990 through the opening in 1992
of the first pedestrian Romanian-Ukrainian border crossing point in the
Maramureş space, for the small traffic and resident’s people access.
Figure 7. Iron Bridge over Tisa between Câmpulung la Tisa (Romania)
and Teresva (Ukraina)
Soviet heritage at the Romanian-Ukrainian borderland in post-socialist...
167
i.) The historical wooden bridge between Sighet and Solotvino
(Slatina), (Figure 8). Is in fact a building enlighten after the fall of the socialist
system, (building started after 1999) that tie the historical communication
connections in this area. It is remembered in this study because of its
delocalization and insertion in its structure, by the Ukrainian side, of two
segments from the old historical bridge in the soviet period and located in
Cămara Sighet-Bila Țerkva (figure 8).
Figure 8. Historical bridge over Tisa between Sighetu Marmaţiei and Solotvino.
The metal part is part of old historical bridge between Sighetu Marmaţiei (Cămara Sighet)
and Bila Ţerkva/Biserica Albă (Ukraina), destroyed after The IInd World War.
CONCLUSIONS
This study brings out two categories of elements that remind and identify
with the soviet inheritance which put its fingerprint in the Maramureş space
over a period of 45 years. The first category shows infrastructure elements that
ensured in the pre soviet period the functionality of Maramureş Land, and
disappeared gradually in the socialist period as a consequence of some USSR’s
activity. We remember here the destruction of the bridges, the tear of road and
railway connections over Tisa, the consolidation and the functional reorientation
of double localities connections. The second category include USSR’s fingerprintelements in the Romanian space, like railways with big wheelbase between the
localities Câmpulung la Tisa and Valea Vişeului, the railway bridge in
Câmpulung la Tisa/Teresva, maintained and reconstructed in USSR’s gain,
soviet heroes graveyard in Sighetu Marmaţiei. All this elements, many of them
included in the collective memory of population can be part of a border crossing
regional development strategy, through inclusion in the touristic circuit of
Maramureş Land. According to field literature, the railway sector in Câmpulung
la Tisa-Sighetu Marmaţiei-Valea Vişeului is the only ex-soviet European space
168
Ioan VLAD, Alexandru ILIEŞ
with two types of railway on the same embankment. For the Maramureş space,
this economic objective deserved to be transformed in one with touristic
functionality. Even if there are moments, benchmark or buildings that remind
us of a less glamorous time for Maramureş Land, and in present, these could
play a double role: the historical one in order not to repeat the mistakes of the
past; the contemporary one that includes the historical inheritance in knowing
under objectives form and touristic activities.
REFERENCES
BOAR, N., (2005), Regiunea transfrontalieră româno-ucraineană a Maramureşului, Presa universitară
clujeană, Cluj-Napoca;
BODOCAN, V., (1997), Geografie politică, Presa universitară clujeană, Cluj-Napoca;
BUFON, M., ILIEŞ, Al., (2011), Between past experiences and future potentials: an agenda for border
studies in Central-Eastern Europe, in Revista Romana de Geografie Politică, XI (2), p. 166-175;
CUNHA, A., (1998), Systems et terrioire: valeurs, concepts et indicateurs pour un autre developpement,
Rev. L’Espace geographique, 3, p. 181-198;
FILIPASCU, A., (2002), Maramueşul, Editura Echim, Sighetu Marmaţiei;
FOUCHER, M., (1991), Fronts et frontiers. Un tour du monde geopolitique, Edition Fayard, Paris;
GLASSNER, I.M., (1995), Political Geography, New York;
HAJDU, Z., (2009), Characteristics of historical evolution, In: Kocsis, K., & F. Schweitzer (eds):
Hungary in Maps, Geographical Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences,
Budapest;
HORVATH, F., KUBINSKY, M., (2003), Vasúttárazságok épitkezései a Bánságban. In Muszkai
Szemle, 23; Cluj-Napoca;
IANOŞ, I., (2000), Sisteme teritoriale. O abordare geografică, Editura Tehnică, Bucureşti;
ILIEŞ, Al., (2003), România între milenii. Frontiere, areale frontaliere şi cooperare transfrontalieră,
Editura Universităţii din Oradea;
ILIEŞ, Al., (2004), România. Euroregiuni, Editura Universităţii din Oradea;
ILIEŞ, Al., (2007), Romanian territories included in cross-border cooperation regions, in: România.
Atlas Istorico-Geografic, Editura Academiei Române, Bucureşti, p. 228;
ILIEŞ, Al., GRAMA, V., (2010a), The external Western Balkan border of the European Union and its
borderland: Premises for building functional transborder territorial systems, in Annals for
Istrian and Mediterranean Studies, Series Historia et Sociologia, 20, 2, Zalozba Annals, Koper,
pp. 457-469;
ILIEŞ, Al., WENDT, A.J., ILIEŞ, Dorina, Camelia, GRAMA, V., (2011a), Romanian/Ukrainian
borderland (Northern Sector) Typology determined by the administrative territorial units (NUTS
3), in Central European Policy and Human Geography, no. 2/2011, ISSN 2062-88-70,
University of Debrecen (http://cerphg.unideb.hu/PDF/CERPHG_2011_2.pdf);
ILIEŞ, Al., Ilieş, Dorina, Camelia, Wendt, A.,J., Tătar Corina, (2011b), Elements and outils generating
systemic functionality at Romanian/Ukrainian border (Northern sector), in Journal of
Geography, Politics and Society, Year I, no 1, June, Gdansk, pp. 15-23;
ILIEŞ, Al., DEHOORNE, O., ILIEŞ Dorina, Camelia, (2012), The Cross-border territorial system in
Romanian-Ukrainian Carpathian Area. Elements, mechanisms and structures generating
premises for an integrated cross-border territorial system with tourist function, in Carpathian
Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, February, vol. 7, no.1, Baia Mare, pp. 27-38;
ILIEŞ, Al., WENDT, A.,J., (2014), Evolution of historical regions and borderlands (1916-2011) at the
Northern Romanian-Ukrainian border, in vol. The New European Frontiers: Social and Spatial
(Re)Integration Issues in Multicultural and Border Regions, Eds.: Bufon, M., Minghi, J., Passi,
A., Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle, pp. 289-303;
ILIEŞ, Al., VLAD, I., (2014), The Northern Sector of the Romanian-Ukrainian Border. Political
Geography Particularities Regarding the Ways and Means of Border-Cross Transit, Revista
Română de Geografie Politică, XVI, 1, pp.56-66;
ILIEŞ, Dorina, Camelia, (2008). Premises of transboundary cooperation in the Geoparks area at the
external border of EU. The subject matter of the Northern sector of the Romanian-Ukrainian
Border, Revista Română de Geografie Politică, X, 1, pp. 15-26;
ILIEŞ, Gabriela, (2007), Țara Marmureşului. Studiu de geografie regională, Presa universitară
clujeană, Cluj-Napoca;
Soviet heritage at the Romanian-Ukrainian borderland in post-socialist...
169
ILIEŞ M., ILIEŞ Dorina, Camelia, JOSAN Ioana, ILIEŞ Al., ILIEŞ Gabriela, (2010), The Gateway of
Maramureş Land. Geostrategical Implications in Space and Time, in Annales. Annals for Istrian
and Mediteranian Studies, Series Historia et Sociologia, ISSN 1408-5348, 20, 2010, 2,
Zalozba Annales, Koper, SLOVENIA, pag. 469-480;
JOHNSON, C., JONES, R., PAASI, A., AMOORE, L., MOUNTZ, Alison, SALTER, M., RUMFORD, C.,
(2011), Interventions on rethinking «the border» in border studies, in Political Geography 30,
Elsevier, pp. 61-69;
KLEINSCHMAGER, R., (1993), Elements de geographie politique, Edition Flamarion, Paris;
KOCSIS, K., (2007), Territory and Boundaries of States, In: Kocsis, K. (eds), South Eastern Europe in
Maps, Geographical Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, p. 29;
MIHALY DE APŞA, Ioan. (1900): Diplome maramureşene din sec XIV-XV, Sighet;
NEGUŢ, S., CUCU, V., VLAD, L.B., (2004), Geopolitica României, Editura Transversal, Târgovişte;
POP, G., (1984), Romînia: Geografia circulaţiei: Căi de comunicaţie, transporturi, relaţii economice de
schimb, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică, Bucureşti;
POPA, N., (2006), Frontiere, regiuni transfrontaliere şi dezvoltare regional în Europa mediană, Editura
Universităţii de Vest, Timişoara;
REY, Viollete, GROZA, O., IANOŞ, I, PĂTROESCU Maria (2002): Atlasul României, Enciclopedia Rao,
Bucureşti, 167 p;
SHORT, J.R., (1993), An Introductiuon to Political geography, Routledge, London & New York;
SOMLYOI, R. (2007): Specific features of historical evolution, In: Kocsis, K., Rudenko, L., & F.
Schweitzer (eds.), Hungary in Maps, Institute of Geography, National Academy of Sciences of
Ukraine, Geographical Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, 147 p;
STAMATE, G., (1997), Frontiera de stat a României, Editura Militară, Bucureşti;
ŞTEFĂNESCU, Şt., BUGĂ, D., DOBRE S., (2007): The Romanian Principalities-Romania (1859-1914),
in România. Atlas Istorico-Geografic, Editura Academiei Române, Bucureşti;
ŞTEFĂNESCU, Şt., BUGĂ, D., RUSENESCU C., STOICESCU, N., NICULESCU G., (2007): Romania
(1918-1940), in România. Atlas Istorico-Geografic, Editura Academiei Române, Bucureşti;
VIOLANTE, A., VITALE, A, (2010), L’Europa alle frontiere dell’unione. Questioni di geografia storica e
di relazioni internazionali delle periferie continentali, Edizioni Unicopli, Milano;
WENDT, A., J., (2003), Territorial Division in Poland and Romania after the Second World War, Revista
Română de Geografie Politică, anul 5, nr 1, Oradea.
Submitted:
September 19, 2014
Revised:
November 20, 2014
Accepted:
November 28, 2014
Published online:
November 28, 2014